Patent Debate

[solarlab]

Jim Mac wrote:
"Those interested in purely profits and legal protection of those profits will need to go elsewhere"

No problem Jim; however, I was interested in discussing "RevI's Device" found in the
"Conversion of atmospheric heat into electricity by using Venturi effct." thread.

https://www.mooker.com/showthread.php?mo...505#pid505

RevI is the only participant that I've found on the Forums that uses ANSYS simulation and
he/she appears to know his/her subject in detail (note that a 3D transient modeller is the only
method that can be used to fully analyze the device he/she refers to).

Anyway, it's your Forum; but, if you change your mind about discussing "all" technology,
patented or otherwise, let us know...

Good luck with your projects - and don't forget; even ANSYS Student can be of great help!

Regards,

SL

[Classic]

SolarLab, I really don’t like what you’re doing and I think you are doing great damage to inventors and forums as well.

Creating some kind of a false impression that some patents being discussed an analysed but without specific information or building replications as proof of concept. The inventors might get tricked that it could be some sort of backup if needed and forums are kept busy for nothing worthwhile as you did for HES.

But you pretend and admit that you have access to wide spectrum of information and instruments high end and keep saying something is working and worth without sharing anything leading to expectations.

So, as we have already seen dr H getting cornered now and i can see the pattern where he sold few devices that were ok until dr H claimed OU and FE and possibly those customers were prepared to return all devices back in the same time … would be nice to see a list of all “scammed” customers and financial links behind, and also why they became unhappy suddenly.

Dr. H and many others should have known that nobody will ever make any money from FE and Ou and all trying to do that will share the same fate as Stanley Meyer, Joseph Newman, Sweet Floyd, Morray, Kapanadze and many others.

Almost all G20 countries have the knowledge, technology and infrastructure to stop instantly oil and gas and launch mass production for devices generating electricity on demand in any size.

So, open source could backup any invention and bring the necessary change.

[solarlab]

Good points, however I do not feel the need to justify or explain my work nor views any further - it's all out there already,
(or at least it was at one point)  and I made it all "open sourced." FWTW  Would like to see a few others as well.

Looking forward to seeing any and all Open Source, or other, OU, FE or Excess Energy device(s), irregardless of the source.

BTW - these guys appear to be happy with their (patented and purchased) devices:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ep05Tu3Ank0&t=1s

At least it's good proof that Excess Energy Devices are viable and have already been accomplished - an incentive to others,
if nothing else!

Have a good one...

[Jim Mac]

No problem Jim; however, I was interested in discussing "RevI's Device" found in the
"Conversion of atmospheric heat into electricity by using Venturi effct." thread.

I did not ban or moderate RevI.  I simply closed the thread. If he wishes to speak of his technology and answer questions in a helpful manner, he is invited.  If a patent owner wishes to share what they know- my all means...  But it seemed he did not have much interest in "helping".  His replies were condescending and even had the nerve to say " I am tired of your wrong math" to a respected  member who chose to engage him to gain understanding.  And nowhere in his posts did he suggest in any way that he is willing to share his knowledge and help the community. (however small the community may be). If he does return and if his actions become a repeatable offense, then he will be moderated.  

And allow me to clarify- I am not saying Patent Holders are not invited.  I am saying this is an "Open Source" community which anyone may come to share or gain knowledge. But there has to be a fine line when it comes to speaking about those individuals or their technology which can lead to trouble. These inventors paid a governmental agency for protection, and might have investors who will use the leverage of the law to maintain their image and portfolios. And I want NOTHING to do with that...  So dialog of that nature will need to be on a short-leash.

And as far as condescending know-it-alls, I don't want them here at all.  So many closet-builders and experimenters will never post anything because of the fear of ridicule from them.  I'd rather be part of an active community of noobs (like me) who work together and support each other, then be stuck in an uninviting atmosphere of douchers. 

SL, we may not agree on patenting and profiteering, but I still appreciate the advice you offer and pleasant support. And I hope you continue to help, and hopefully share what you know.  Would you be open to starting a Q&A thread on your technology? Perhaps give a description and open it up to questions?  I would love to understand more about your stuff

[solarlab]

No problem Jim; however, I was interested in discussing "RevI's Device" found in the
"Conversion of atmospheric heat into electricity by using Venturi effct." thread.

I did not ban or moderate RevI.  I simply closed the thread. If he wishes to speak of his technology and answer questions in a helpful manner, he is invited.  If a patent owner wishes to share what they know- my all means...  But it seemed he did not have much interest in "helping".  His replies were condescending and even had the nerve to say " I am tired of your wrong math" to a respected  member who chose to engage him to gain understanding.  And nowhere in his posts did he suggest in any way that he is willing to share his knowledge and help the community. (however small the community may be). If he does return and if his actions become a repeatable offense, then he will be moderated.  

And allow me to clarify- I am not saying Patent Holders are not invited.  I am saying this is an "Open Source" community which anyone may come to share or gain knowledge. But there has to be a fine line when it comes to speaking about those individuals or their technology which can lead to trouble. These inventors paid a governmental agency for protection, and might have investors who will use the leverage of the law to maintain their image and portfolios. And I want NOTHING to do with that...  So dialog of that nature will need to be on a short-leash.

And as far as condescending know-it-alls, I don't want them here at all.  So many closet-builders and experimenters will never post anything because of the fear of ridicule from them.  I'd rather be part of an active community of noobs (like me) who work together and support each other, then be stuck in an uninviting atmosphere of douchers. 

SL, we may not agree on patenting and profiteering, but I still appreciate the advice you offer and pleasant support. And I hope you continue to help, and hopefully share what you know.  Would you be open to starting a Q&A thread on your technology? Perhaps give a description and open it up to questions?  I would love to understand more about your stuff

Hi Jim (forgive me being a little informal),

Sounds good - we can give it a go and see what happens...

My approach is a bit different than most (a lot of CAE use) but if anyone is offended they can just use the ole' ON/OFF button!

One request however - participants download a copy of ANSYS STUDENT (it's free and I don't believe you even have to register);
and become a bit familiar with the UI and such.

Although it does not allow "Transient Analysis," the other pieces (including Magnetostatic, etc.) can be quite helpful in getting to 
know some of the "complex basics" of Electro-Magnetic design and how it can relate to energy gain and so forth. 

I think you can also share files, which makes explaining things much quicker. It might be a good, common, tool for everyone to work 
from and refer to (their Help files are technically excellent and serve as some good reference material as well). Don't worry - it won't 
be like the boring University lectures we're all accustom to! We can quickly work through the "getting started" stuff as well.

  *[Disclaimer - I have nothing what so ever to do with anything ANSYS, other than a User of their product]*

I was going to post some the highlights of the "LinGen" development here on your Forum but it still might be a bit dicey. So, maybe
just working through a few of the concepts (using, in-part, ANSYS) might be a productive approach (?)... combined with a sort-of
Q & A thing.

Hey - we have to get this Excess Energy Generation (EEG) concepts thing off-the-ground and up-to-speed before it's too late.

SL

Set up a thread - I'll watch for it...

[Jim Mac]

Ok-  is Solid State Devices the right category?  And this link https://www.ansys.com/academic/students/ansys-student  ?

Alternatively, if you want to start the thread, even better because you know the system and should have the first words.  But I will if you insist.

I will certainly try to use the software and follow along.  Looking forward to it!

[solarlab]

The link appears OK. Although it's a zip file, don't remember how I did it - been a while since I looked at the Student version.
Not sure what the PC/CPU/Memory requirements are but it seems OK on a cheap HP craptop!

If you could start the link (and supervise it) that would be great.

Maybe call it something like "EEG EM Basic" [my creativity overwhelms me!] :o)

[chaorro]

If patents were safe then I would say go for it, but they are not. Here in Canada, the government blanket refuses to patent anything over-unity related and in the USA, they confiscate your intellectual property as a matter of business.

There will be no getting rich off of over-unity for us regular people. If we want to promote over-unity, it'll have to be out of service.

[solarlab]

Using "Trade Secrets" is one method you can use in an attempt to protect your intellectual property; problem is
you can not reveal anything about it to anyone (good for internal stuff however, have used this approach a lot).

If you do, or the device techniques are reverse engineered, you have no protection, zero, and attracting money
(investors) to further develop, fabricate, market and distribute your device becomes non-existant. The invention
(idea) will likely die on the bench. Like it or not, development cost money, sometimes a lot of money.

BTW - HES (Dr. Holcomb) appears to have broken the Patent Office "glass ceiling" with his patents relating to
"Excess Energy Generators."  Following his progress through the system was quite interesting, to say the least.

If you have a valid "over-unity" device you may just "get rich off it (making money is not a bad thing, by the way).
Holcomb seems to have "broke through" the barrier and, at least so far, he seems to be doing OK (Board Member, etc.).
Of course he did put over 15 years of work into developing and building it (and was funded by investors towards the
later stages of [the expensive part] fabrication and testing!    Actually, we're all "regular people."

My humble observation over time is that, by and large, those who clammer for open source do not have anything of
value or anything that works, and those that do, generally try and protect it, one way or another. If the open-sourcers
did have something, we would have seen it by now, right?    Typical human nature!

Unfortunately, again more often than not, those that "brag-it-up" but have nothing substantial eventually start making
up excuses or stories about "Men-in-Black," etc.    We've all heard and seen dozens of these "duck-out" jobs.

Also, I have several unique designs that the government has classified - they relate to "cool apparatus's" that, I have to
agree, would not be in anyones best interest if they were known to the public (or others).

Anyway, not long now before things "open up" quite a bit... Stay the course - we're closer than you may think!

[Classic]

Well, that’s only one side of the truth @solarlab, Arie Degeus Melis got few overunity patents ad he started to register his patents in Europe, than later in USA where patent office have asked numerous time the inventor to remove essential informations from patents.

I found out the US patent offices are the most dangerous for inventors and have became a death trap.

Also I am personally developing a self sustained system for heating or electricity generation which will be open source with all details. Also there is more open source devices disclosed and cheap to replicate with decent output and my devices are based on them plus few more improvements. I am more than happy to see any individuals our businesses to build and sell.

Also note, that all Arie Melis De Geus patents have expired and anyone can use them free of charge and they are far easier and efficient than Holocombs. And all his patents were backed up by working devices tested in patent offices and labs